the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Summary

the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Jackson v. Bishop, 404 F.2d 571… (1968 | noyear)

In summary, then, so far as the Supreme Court cases are concerned, we have a flat recognition that the limits of the Eighth Amendment's proscription are not easily or exactly defined, and we also have clear indications that the applicable standards are flexible, that disproportion, both among punishments and between punishment and crime, is a factor to be considered, and that broad and idealistic concepts of dignity, civilized standards, humanity, and decency are useful and usable.
Source: Wikisource

the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Jackson v. Bishop, 404 F.2d 571… (1968 | noyear)

The Eighth Amendment's basic concept "is nothing less than the dignity of man" and assures that a state's punishment power "be exercised within the limits of civilized standards." Fines, imprisonment, and even execution may be imposed "but any technique outside the bounds of these traditional penalties is constitutionally suspect."
Source: Wikisource

the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Jackson v. Bishop, 404 F.2d 571… (1968 | noyear)

There can be no argument that excessive whipping or an inappropriate manner of whipping or too great frequency of whipping or the [*580] use of studded or overlong straps all constitute cruel and unusual punishment. But if whipping were to be authorized, how does one, or any court, ascertain the point which would distinguish the permissible from that which is cruel and unusual? (7) Corporal punishment generates hate toward the keepers who punish and toward the system which permits it. It is degrading to the punisher and to the punished alike.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature